Firezone vs SoftEther VPN

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted remote access & vpn options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeatureFirezoneSoftEther VPN
CategoryRemote Access & VPNRemote Access & VPN
LicenseApache-2.0Apache-2.0
LanguageElixirC
Setup difficultyMediumHard
Min. RAM1,024 MB256 MB
Deploymentdocker, bare-metalbare-metal, binary
GitHub stars★ 8,993★ 13,447
First released20212014
ReplacesCisco AnyConnect, TailscaleCisco AnyConnect

Why pick each one

Choose Firezone if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 9k GitHub stars
  • Written in Elixir
Firezone details

Choose SoftEther VPN if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • Mature project with 13.4k GitHub stars
  • Written in C
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
SoftEther VPN details

Frequently asked questions

Is Firezone or SoftEther VPN better?

Neither is universally better. SoftEther VPN has the larger community, while Firezone is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Firezone and SoftEther VPN free and open-source?

Yes. Firezone is licensed under Apache-2.0 and SoftEther VPN under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Firezone and SoftEther VPN with Docker?

Firezone: yes. SoftEther VPN: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons